SEC v. North East Capital and LLCand Anthony T. Vicidomine (unregistered distributions, 2013)
Settled
Checked against the primary document on October 2, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, with sampled and disputed records read a second time. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.
In 2013 the SEC settled an administrative order against North East Capital, LLC and Anthony T. Vicidomine for misappropriated fund fees and an unregistered fund offering, with a $150,000 penalty and $189,415 disgorgement.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | 3-15429 |
| Date filed | 2013-08-16 |
| Date resolved | 2013-08-16 |
| Status | settled |
| Asset class | bonds |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Bars imposed | registration bar |
| Defendants | North East Capital, LLC ; Anthony T. Vicidomine |
| Cited as charged or alleged | Advisers Act s.206 ; Exchange Act s.10(b) and Rule 10b-5 ; Securities Act s.17(a) ; Securities Act s.5 |
| Techniques | Unregistered distributions |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- $150k
- Disgorgement
- $189k
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- $339k
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
On August 16, 2013 the SEC accepted settlements with North East Capital, LLC, an unregistered investment adviser, and its principal Anthony T. Vicidomine. The order finds that from November 2011 to March 2012 he took $189,415 of the fund's assets as unearned incentive fees, and that the fund raised money in an offering that violated Securities Act Section 5, alongside Advisers Act and Investment Company Act violations. The record previously showed the respondent as 'North East Capital' and 'LLCand Anthony T. Vicidomine'.
This library tags the matter as unregistered distributions, based on the conduct the document describes. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.
For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the release.
What technique is this, and how does it work?
This action is tagged with one technique in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.
- Unregistered distributions — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
Primary documents
Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.
Related actions
Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.
| Action | Agency | Filed | Technique | Penalty | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEC v. Zachary Miller (unregistered distributions, 2026) | SEC | 2026-03-05 | Unregistered Distributions | — | settled |
| SEC v. David Hudzik (unregistered distributions, 2025) | SEC | 2025-12-23 | Unregistered Distributions | $70k | judgment |
| SEC v. Ongkaruck Sripetch and others (pump and dump, 2025) | SEC | 2025-06-20 | Pump And Dump , Unregistered Distributions | $204k | judgment |
| SEC v. Peter Scalise III and The3rdBevco Inc. (unregistered distributions, 2025) | SEC | 2025-06-17 | Unregistered Distributions | $236k | settled |
| SEC v. Investview, Inc. (unregistered distributions, 2025) | SEC | 2025-01-17 | Unregistered Distributions | $375k | settled |
| SEC v. Tai Mo Shan Limited (unregistered distributions, 2024) | SEC | 2024-12-20 | Unregistered Distributions | $36.7m | settled |